We'll pick up the soon to be fired coach from Maryland.

[I4CtheFuture]

He's like 35-48 over 8 years.

He'll be cheap. He's a proven loser. BUT.... since it's us, we'll put the old Muschamp "He has learned" spin on it.

 

[Skuddy]

He's like 35-48 over 8 years.

He'll be cheap. He's a proven loser. BUT.... since it's us, we'll put the old Muschamp "He has learned" spin on it.

Looking at our history, I think it is time to go the retired legend route. He comes in, wins just enough to make people say "it can be done here" then banks another buyout after a bad season or two. Rinse and repeat.

 

[Piscis]

Looking at our history, I think it is time to go the retired legend route. He comes in, wins just enough to make people say "it can be done here" then banks another buyout after a bad season or two. Rinse and repeat.

It might be hard now that NIL and the portal are things. Saban, Meyer, etc. probably hate what college football has become. I know Saban has zero interest in coaching.

Also, with what coaches make now, there is pretty much zero financial incentive for them to come back once they retire. Beamer will have enough money that no one in his family for many generations will ever have to work again if they are halfway good with the money.

 

[Go Gamecocks]

He's like 35-48 over 8 years.

He'll be cheap. He's a proven loser. BUT.... since it's us, we'll put the old Muschamp "He has learned" spin on it.

Ray is gone.

 

[I4CtheFuture]

Ray is gone.

But the chicken curse remains

 

[Rob Hawk]

Ray is gone.

No he's not. Still involved making a mill a year. And the BOT must love him with the buyouts they approved.

 

[USCALUMNI]

It might be hard now that NIL and the portal are things. Saban, Meyer, etc. probably hate what college football has become. I know Saban has zero interest in coaching.

Also, with what coaches make now, there is pretty much zero financial incentive for them to come back once they retire. Beamer will have enough money that no one in his family for many generations will ever have to work again if they are halfway good with the money.

I honestly believe this was Muschamp's motive the last 2 years of his contract. He had the 15 million buyout in place and he was like WTF I can walk away. But that is just me.

USCALUMNI

 

[RL09]

He's like 35-48 over 8 years.

He'll be cheap. He's a proven loser. BUT.... since it's us, we'll put the old Muschamp "He has learned" spin on it.

we do not have a coaching vacancy and nor do I expect we will for the foreseeable future, so unless we hire him in an off-field analyst position he won't be joining this staff

 

[Lurker123]

we do not have a coaching vacancy and not do I expect we will for the foreseeable future, so unless we hire him in an off field analyst position he won't be joining this staff

You seem very confident Beamer wont be let go. Even "insiders" are debating it now.

 

[RL09]

You seem very confident Beamer wont be let go. Even "insiders" are debating it now.

South Carolina flinched at the prospect of firing Muschamp when his buyout was $18 million so he was retained for another year to reduce his buyout by $5 million. While this may be very unpopular, I think a far less expensive alternative to firing Beamer and perhaps more effective solution would be to replace Clayton White with a high level DC, replace Mike Furrey and perhaps the linebackers coach. If we cannot fire Beamer or transition him to another position, make him better by surrounding him with highly effective people.

 

[Lurker123]

South Carolina flinched at the prospect of firing Muschamp when his buyout was $18 million so he was retained for another year to reduce his buyout by $5 million. While this may be very unpopular, I think a far less expensive alternative to firing Beamer and perhaps more effective solution would be to replace Clayton White with a high level DC, replace Mike Furrey and perhaps the linebackers coach. If we cannot fire Beamer or transition him to another position, make him better by surrounding him with highly effective people.

We also may have hesitated for that year because it was his first bad year. (He did go 6-6 his first year, losing the bowl game) But he had the winningest first 3 years, right? So a single 4-8 season in that 4th year would not be grounds for immediate termination. Or at least it could be argued.

Shane is staring down a 3rd losing season in 4 years.